本文介紹權力基礎理論（power basis theory; Pratto, Lee, Tan, & Pitpitan, 2010），提出一個權力（power）定義說明何以各類權力可引發知覺權力，並探討一個權力運作的基本原則─權力增生性。權力基礎理論認為權力為生存環境中個人滿足自我需求的能力，越得以滿足自我需求者權力越高，評估需求滿足的基礎稱為權力基礎。高權力者透過不同行為滿足自己的各種需求，使其具有不同權力基礎優勢，稱為客觀權力增生性。而高權力者具有權力基礎優勢，使知覺者對其產生知覺權力。即使沒有確切訊息，低權力者或旁觀者假定高權力者在不同權力基礎具有優勢，稱為知覺權力增生性。本論文以三個研究檢驗權力基礎理論提出的權力定義與知覺權力增生性。研究一發現反映需求滿足狀態的權力基礎特質評估與生活滿意度有正相關，支持權力對應需求的觀點。研究二發現權力基礎優勢訊息引發知覺權力，支持權力基礎理論的權力定義。研究三發現即使缺乏確切訊息，知覺者會以為高權力者具有多種權力，支持知覺權力增生性。文中並檢視性別與權力的關係。The literature offers divergent definitions of power. Based on a power-as-need perspective, researchers observed various psychological and behavioral implications resulting from pursuing power. However, the power-asneed perspective has difficulty to account for why various types of power can be effective or to present fundamental principles in guiding the dynamics of power. I introduced a power basis theory (Pratto et al., 2010), in which we offered a definition of power and delineated three basic principles in power dynamics. Power is defined as the relative ability to meet one's needs in one's ecological field. The basis in which a person's particular need is evaluated is called power basis. According to power basis theory, because power corresponds to one's needs, one's sensitivity to a given need affects one's perceived power in the given power basis. Furthermore, different types of power can be effective in terms of how they fulfill or deprive of others' needs. Social perceptions of powerholders may differ on the levels of perceived trustworthiness in terms of how powerholders use power. Powerholders who use power to fulfill others' needs are perceived to be trustworthy, whereas those who use power to deprive of others' needs are perceived to be untrustworthy. Lastly, because human beings have different needs, a person's power can be fungible. When people have one particular type of power, they are more likely to have other types of power, resulting in actual power fungibility. When information is lacking, powerholders are more likely to be assumed having different types of power; such a phenomenon is called perceived power fungibility. Three studies were conducted to test whether (1) power corresponds to needs but pursuing power is not a need, (2) superiority in a given power basis is related to perceived power, and (3) when powerholders enjoy superiority in a given power basis, there is evidence for perceived power fungibility. Indeed, participants' selfratings data showed that the more a need is satisfied, the higher one's life satisfaction is (Study 1). Moreover, superiority in a given power basis increased perceived power, supporting the power definition offered by power basis theory (Study 2). When controlling for actual power, the more the powerholders were viewed with one type of power, the more they were viewed with other types of power, providing evidence for perceived power fungibility (Study 3). Evidence regarding power and gender was presented and further implications of power basis theory were discussed.